The caterpillar track was revolutionary in the business of defense.
You can find variations of this technological advancement dating back to the 1770’s with several different inventors trying to revolutionize and patent the continuous track. For forty years, a British politician named Richard Lovell Edgeworth tried to figure out the caterpillar track and came up with a “cart that carries its own road.” In the 1830’s, British and Russian inventors seemed to be racing toward figuring out just how to perfect and (more importantly) patent the technology that was before us. The idea was to take the wheel and take the railroad and find a way where Doc Brown was correct in saying, “Where we’re going, we don’t need roads.”
In 1946, a British engineer named James Boydell came up with the Dreadnaught Wheel, which is essentially a way for wheels to grip the roads and railways, but it was far too bulky to have consistent, practical use. The caterpillar track was really going to be the progressive way to move large modes of transportation without needing manicured roads and paths. By being able to make it an all-terrain track, you were showing that very few obstacles could stop you from getting your cargo, in whatever shape, form, or use it may be, where it needed to be with even weight distribution to prevent breakdowns in structure and sinking into the ground. This sinking into the ground was a problem when there wasn’t concrete and asphalt to provide a proper layer between vehicles and dirt.
John Fowler patented the “endless railway” in 1858, but it was Russian Fyodor Blinov in 1873 that created the caterpillar-type links to further the idea of what Fowler had created. While various inventors and engineers played around with this ever-evolving method of distributing a safe and sturdy mode of freighting, it finally took hold in the late 19th and early 20th centuries as one of the most impressive avenues for military weaponry and destruction that we still see today. Continue Reading…
True story: I could find exactly ZERO pictures of Knicks-Wolves games that had any players who would actually be playing tonight. So you get Kevin Love and MWP.
With the Timberwolves set to square off against the visiting New York Knickerbockers tonight, I exchanged email questions with Knickerblogger‘s Robert Silverman so we could each learn a little more about one another. My responses to his questions are up on Knickerblogger right here, and his to mine are below.
For as long as I’ve been following them (which dates back to the late ’90s), the Knicks have always seemed to have a “we don’t rebuild, we reload” attitude that has resulted in a lot of hand-waving but not a lot beyond first round playoff exits. Is there some sense that with Phil Jackson the team is actually building something now instead of just paying it lip service, even if the early returns are not great?
So far, without a doubt. For the most part, fans are aware that this is going to be a transitional year, filled with nights where the team looks downright terrible. In a related story, as I’m writing this, the Milwaukee Bucks closed the second quarter on a 22-6 run, and the Knicks couldn’t stop anyone from getting to the rim, were absolutely walloped on the glass and got shredded from downtown by some dude from Jonathan Fire*Eater. Wait, that was Ilyasova? Lawdy. Anyhoo, yes, the pains from growing will be legion, but having faith that there’s an actual plan in place as is infinitely preferable to the world’s saddest free agency carousel, with the likes of Allan Houston, McDyess, Starbury, Steve Francis, Eddy Curry and STAT posited as franchise “saviors,” but instead just clogging the cap, glumly slumped on too-small plastic horses. Continue Reading…
The Timberwolves’ free-throw shooting is occasionally mediocre and often terrible. Their three-point shooting, as has been well-documented in these very pages, is historically awful. So when you’re thinking about the team’s chances on a particular night it’s important to realize: the Wolves, in essence, begin nearly every game in a scoring hole. In order to have a chance to win, they have to make up for and exceed this almost pre-ordained deficit by surpassing their opponent in other phases of the game.
This, I think, is a useful way of analyzing Friday night’s loss to the Knicks. In a six-point loss, the Wolves made just one fewer field goal than New York. They grabbed two more offensive rebounds and went to the line seven more times, the latter of which suggests that despite the nearly identical field goal percentages, the Wolves actually did a better job of creating good scoring chances than did the Knicks. All of that looks pretty good, right? Well how about this: the Knicks made 16 of their twenty free-throws (80%) and the Wolves made 19 of their 27 (just 70.4%). And now the really bad news: the Knicks made a below-average eight out of their 26 threes. The Wolves? One for 13, which is 7.7% if you’re into math. The rough reality becomes apparent: when you shoot threes that badly, playing your opponent evenly is simply not good enough.
ESPN is reporting that the Knicks have finally landed Mr. Carmelo Anthony. In exchange, the Knicks have traded almost all of their young players plus Governor’s Island and three scuzzy, bro-infested East Village bars. For us, though, here’s the important part:
New York will send Anthony Randolph and Eddy Curry to Minnesota as part of the deal in exchange for Corey Brewer, a league source told Broussard.
I hope that, just once, the Wolves deign to put Darko and Curry on the floor together. That would be pure magic.
By the way, Corey Brewer is/was my favorite T-Wolf. This hurts a little.
As you may have heard, Carmelo Anthony wants to play for the New York Knicks. You may have also heard that, for various reason, consummating this seemingly modest desire has been extraordinarily difficult. Well, it seems our very own Timberwolves may have been pulled into this convoluted narrative. It goes a little something like this (from ESPN’s Marc Stein):
A Timberwolves source told ESPN The Magazine’s Ric Bucher on Sunday that the team would not approve of a deal where the team received just New York’s Randolph and Curry with Brewer and a first-rounder heading to Denver. While these are the names currently being discussed, additional players could be added to make a deal possible, sources said.
Be honest. You weren’t watching the first quarter. Not when the Knicks and Celitcs were deeply engaged in what has been the game of this young season. Who could turn their attention elsewhere while Amar’e Stoudemire bounded and astounded his way through, around and over our beloved K.G.?
Sorry, not this guy. That’s what DVR’s are for.
With minutes left in lower Manhattan’s celebration of their not so triumphant return to relevancy, the Garden faithful erupted into that ubiquitous three syllable chant every athlete longs to hear. Surprisingly enough, he actually deserved it.
Friends we have a lot to discuss. I’ve only been going to NBA games for a few years now, but Friday night’s 112-103 Wolves’ win was probably the most amazing basketball thing I’ve seen in person. It’s startling to ponder that the Wolves came back from 21 points down in the third quarter, put together a 49-19 second-half run, and no one is really even mentioning it. Its just an ancillary tidbit to the stupefying exhibition put on by Mike Beasley and, of course, Kevin Love. (It’s also startling to ponder the fact that this game wasn’t on local TV. Oops)
Standing on Shoulders
There are lots of ways to parse this thing: the first 30-rebound game since Black Moses (this video has swears, fyi) in ’82; a 15-board third quarter (one quarter!), only three shy of Nate Thurmond’s 35-year-old NBA record; a 25-point, 22-rebound second half. As Kurt Rambis remarked, “those numbers are just stupid numbers”. (By the way, you’ll notice that all of the top 100 or so rebounding games in NBA history came in the ’50’s and ’60’s and were all pretty much notched by Bill Russell and Wilt Chamberlain. In terms of pace of play, sheer number of misses and the disparity between the great players and the field, this era is essentially impossible to compare with our own. When you consider this, Love’s feat is even more remarkable.)
But those are just facts and figures. And the farther away we get from a moment like this, the more the intensity and thrill get diluted and compressed, diffused into the ether of factuality. What was really stunning for me was watching Love in the third quarter as his heavy energy began to surge and his reddening face assumed a certain fixed, manic glow. He was on such a different plane of desire and purpose than anyone else (especially any Knick) that he almost seemed to be all alone on the floor, bathed in some strange light. Look at the highlights. Watch him hold off three Knicks at once and pull the ball down with one hand; watch him ferociously pursue every carom and tip; watch him out-jump Amar’e Stoudemire; watch him grab every single rebound.
There were lots of stranger elements to this too. Love’s career-high 31 points was a mess of errant jump-hooks and blown layups. Even in his 9-18 second half (plus 6-8 from the line), the epic focus required to chase down all of those balls didn’t seem to extend to his touch around the rim. Even though he confessed to the strategy of “throw it up there and get the rebound like Moses Malone,” (he then added that it “always worked in high school”) he also admitted to rushing his shots at the hoop.
Love also found himself checking Stoudemire, probably the most fearsome face-the-basket big man in the league, and a player so explosive and quick and with such supple touch that it would seem like a nightmare matchup for the undersized, heavy footed Love. But there was Love all fourth quarter, getting into Stoudemire’s body, forcing him into the swarming help defense, even spiking one of his jump hooks 30 feet down the floor. It defies credulity: how could Amar’e possibly miss five of eight shots while being guarded by Kevin Love?
Speaking of defense, the Wolves’ defensive turnaround in this game was pretty remarkable. In the first half, the Wolves learned some hard lessons about three-point shooters. Their pick-and-roll coverage was a little imprecise, their closeouts and rotations a little slow. Ray Felton and Danilo Gallinari took advantage of the extra space and hit seven of their 11 threes. Rambis explained: “Whenever a team collapses your defense and they also have outside shooters, everybody’s gotta do the right thing at the right time and be ready to fire out to get to shooters…we explained to them, however close you are, that’s not close enough.”
Surprisingly though, the Wolves actually managed to learn this lesson within the course of the game. If the enduring image of the first half was Gallinari hitting one of his buttery threes over a desperately outstretched hand, Corey Brewer provided the second half counterpoint. As Felton drove into the paint, Gallinari had floated over to the left wing and readied himself to receive the kickout; but by the time Gallo received the ball (and not a moment later), Brewer had already invaded his shooting space. Corey was balanced, under control and sitting on the young Italian’s right hand. Forced to go left, Gallinari awkwardly pushed off of Brewer’s chest and took an offensive foul.
The Wolves did their part on Friday to expose what looks to be a weakness of the Mike D’Antoni offensive system. D’Antoni’s Phoenix teams of Steve Nash, Amar’e and a host of cold-eyed three-point shooters presented opponents with an impossible task: protect the rim from Stoudemire’s terrifying finishes, pressure Nash enough to deter him from shooting and close out on the outside shooters. But, in Felton, the Knicks don’t a magical, unreasonably beautiful playmaker and scorer at the helm, just an average one. And it turns out that accomplishing two of those three things–collapsing on Stoudemire inside and also protecting the three-point line–while not easy is certainly doable. And in the third quarter, when the Wolves were finally able to prevent the machine from humming smoothly along, the Knicks totally lost it (Amar’e’s foul trouble certainly didn’t help), missing a staggering 31 of their 43 second half shots. That, combined with their callow effort on the boards, is gonna lose you some ballgames.
It’s So Eazy
Finally, Michael Beasley. Given his intemperate emotions and distractible mind, I would never have predicted that he would put together a second consecutive game of such poise and judgment. But there he was again on Friday, sizing up the defense, reading the space on the floor, moving the ball. It must be said that Beasley has been doing this prolific scoring (he’s hit 33 of 60 in the past two games) against some fairly lame defenses (the Knicks have the 14th best defensive efficiency in the league; the Kings have the worst).
For his part, Gallinari looks pretty quick with the ball in his hands but in the first half he accomplished the impressive feat of giving Beasley space to shoot his jumper while also being unable to prevent him from getting into the paint. Although they were less apt to be utterly torched off the dribble, both Wilson Chandler and Landry Fields also curiously gave Beasley room to shoot, just as the Kings did on Wednesday. (B-Eazy himself was unmoved by the big-numbers-against-soft-defenders argument. “I’m a monster and every day is Halloween,” was his only reply. That’s cool.)
Even so, its interesting to note the changes in Beasley’s demeanor and carriage over the past two games. Its been nice to see him ecstatic and smiling but even nicer to observe the calm that he’s shown with the ball. Before this week, his jumper had been erratic in both form and result. He was impatient; his feet were jittery and unbalanced; his body position was wildly inconsistent. But recently, each time he’s risen to shoot, he’s shown the same, compact, unhurried stroke. Is this going to be a consistent thing? Wouldn’t that be amazing?
Wow, Anthony Randolph and Amar’e Stoudemire are on the same team. Galaxies will explode; matter will dissolve; Toney Douglas will become a man.
But the Wolves didn’t just mope around tearfully staring at their framed David Lee basketball card. Nope, instead they managed to land Michael Beasley, the second pick in the 2008 draft in exchange, essentially, for nothing:
Sources close to the situation told ESPN.com that the Heat agreed Thursday night to a trade that will send Beasley to the Minnesota Timberwolves, who can simply absorb Beasley into empty salary-cap space and furnish Miami with additional financial flexibility to continue the dramatic transformation of its roster. To complete the trade, Minnesota must only part with a 2011 second-round pick to acquire Beasley. The teams have also agreed to a swap of unspecified future first-round picks.
One reason that this move is awesome is that, until the Three Tenors officially sign their deals, the Heat have only one player on their roster, Mario Chalmers. This is the answer to one of those great heretofore totally irrelevant bored basketball nerd hypotheticals: would you trade your entire team for Lebron, Wade and Bosh? (Yes, apparently).
On the other other hand, have you noticed that the Wolves now have a whole lot of forwards on their team? Especially ones (like Beasley, Love and Jefferson) that are a little undersized and that don’t defend all that well? More moves to come, I’ll wager.